At the turn of the twentieth century, conflict between classes, sexes, and immigrant groups created an environment of desire for political and social change. Articles written by Maureen A. Flanagan and Shelton Stromquist detail the importance of women and working class groups respectively, on the impact of political thought and the birth of the Progressive movement in America. Though both authors believe that one demographic had the profound influence in their common urban settings, I believe that both women and the working class had not only similar impacts, but similar goals in contributing to the rise of progressivism.
Maureen Flanagan points out the different goals for reform between the men and women of the Chicago City Clubs.1 Sanitation, education, and myriad other municipal systems concerned both men and women at the time, but “…when the members of the Woman's City Club confronted these problems, they came to a vision of a good city and specific proposals of how best to provide for the welfare of its residents that were very different from those of their male counterparts in the City Club.”2 Women angled for more governmental contributions and standards. They voiced these views and played a large part in behind the scenes politics, but were relegated to the periphery and seen as secondary citizen due to their inability to vote until 1920.
Similarly, Shelton Stomquist details the “new” and “old” immigrant classes in Cleveland in his article about the Progressive movement.3 Able to create headlines and pressure the direction of politics through strikes and sometimes violence, the immigrant working class stood as a huge proponent for reform in many municipal systems.4 One observation made by Stromquist, “ These epidsodes, often brief but intense and frequently centered around streetcar strikes, had an impact on local party alignments and the programmatic direction of reform.”5 However, again similar to women, “…political initiative most often lay in the hands of others.”6
Both groups impacted the progressive movement by influencing local politics despite their perceived limited political power. Middle to upper class men aimed to protect business interests and “private enterprise”.7 Women and the immigrant working class, evident in urban Chicago and Cleveland, strove for, as L.B. Tuckerman stated, “better hospital facilities, and more adequate health services, labor representation on the police board, public ownership of utilities and an improved school system”.8 The emphasis on public ownership and government responsibility were goals common to both women’s politics and the immigrant working class. Despite the difference in gender, both groups define progressive thought and its rise to the political forefront during the early 1900’s and widely effecting the election of 1912.
1Maureen A. Flanagan, “Gender and Urban Political Reform: The City Club and the Woman’s City Club of Chicago in the Progressive Era,” The American Historical Review, 94, no. 4 (Oct., 1990), 1032-1050. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2163477 (accessed Feb 15, 2012)
2Ibid.
3Shelton Stromquist, “The Crucible of Class: Cleveland politics and the Origins of Municipal Reform in the Progressive Era,” Journal of Urban History 23, no. 2 (1/31/1997). http://juh.sagepub.com/content/23/2/192.full.pdf (accessed Feb 15, 2012.)
4Ibid, 204.
5Ibid.
6Ibid.
7 Maureen A. Flanagan, “Gender and Urban Political Reform: The City Club and the Woman’s City Club of Chicago in the Progressive Era,” The American Historical Review, 94, no. 4 (Oct., 1990), 1037. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2163477 (accessed Feb 15, 2012)
8 Shelton Stromquist, “The Crucible of Class: Cleveland politics and the Origins of Municipal Reform in the Progressive Era,” Journal of Urban History 23, no. 2 (1/31/1997), 198. http://juh.sagepub.com/content/23/2/192.full.pdf (accessed Feb 15, 2012.)